NARROWS REALTY CO., INC. v. State

329 P.2d 836, 52 Wash. 2d 843, 1958 Wash. LEXIS 450
CourtWashington Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 12, 1958
Docket34302
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 329 P.2d 836 (NARROWS REALTY CO., INC. v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Washington Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
NARROWS REALTY CO., INC. v. State, 329 P.2d 836, 52 Wash. 2d 843, 1958 Wash. LEXIS 450 (Wash. 1958).

Opinion

Foster, J.

The state of Washington, defendant below, and a group of interveners appealed from a judgment quieting respondent’s title to a strip of land in Pierce county between the meander line and the line of ordinary high tide.

On March 16, 1883, Charles C. Miller, pursuant to the *844 Timber and Stone act (20 Stat. 89), made proof of all facts necessary for a patent to the three government lots 2 in question bordering on the east shore of the Narrows on Puget sound, an arm of the sea. Miller paid the full purchase price and received, in return, the official receipt of the receiver of the United States land office, at Olympia, Washington Territory. The court found:

“That thereupon the said Charles C. Miller became the equitable owner of said lands, the westerly boundary of which' was fixed by the meander line as established by United States Government Survey, and entitled to receive a patent for said lands from the United States of America. . » •

The strip here involved is between the line of ordinary high tide 3 and the meander line, 4 which is below that of ordinary high tide, and is illustrated by the sketch below taken from an exhibit.

While Miller then became entitled to a patent, none was issued directly to him or to any successor in interest. However, on July 25,1892, a patent was issued to John C. Shaw, which patent was decreed, by the United States court, to have been in trust for Miller’s successors in interest in whom title was quieted.

Respondent relies upon that patent. The judgment determined that the seaward boundary of the land extended to the meander line as established by the United States government survey. Appellants contend that the patent is *846 erroneous and that the seaward boundary is marked by the line of ordinary, high. fide. ....

*845

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

King County v. Abernathy
Washington Supreme Court, 2024
Harris v. Hylebos Industries, Inc.
505 P.2d 457 (Washington Supreme Court, 1973)
Smith Tug & Barge Co. v. Columbia-Pacific Towing Corp.
482 P.2d 769 (Washington Supreme Court, 1971)
Anderson v. Olson
461 P.2d 343 (Washington Supreme Court, 1969)
Hughes v. State
410 P.2d 20 (Washington Supreme Court, 1966)
Mercer Island Beach Club v. Pugh
334 P.2d 534 (Washington Supreme Court, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
329 P.2d 836, 52 Wash. 2d 843, 1958 Wash. LEXIS 450, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/narrows-realty-co-inc-v-state-wash-1958.